RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00801

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) date be adjusted to  
17 Sep 13 instead of 13 Apr 15 for the purposes of the Post-9/11 
GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was incorrectly counseled on three occasions regarding TEB.  
He was counseled regarding the four year ADSC and that the time 
for the commitment started when he enrolled, with no additional 
action needed on his part.  On 23 Mar 11, he discovered there is 
an application process which begins the TEB process as well as 
the TEB service commitment.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty as a major.

On 23 Mar 11, according to the Defense Manpower Data Center 
(DMDC) application, he applied for TEB the first time.  
Additionally, he inquired with the Total Force Service Center 
(TFSC) stating he was in the process of submitting his TEB on 
that day.  

On 8 Apr 11, the application he submitted on 23 Mar, 11 was 
rejected because he failed to sign the Statement of 
Understanding (SOU).
  
On 14 Apr 11, he submitted his application for TEB which was 
ultimately approved on 21 Apr 11.  Therefore, based on the 
applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date he would 
incur a four year ADSC from the date of his TEB request giving 
him an ADSC of 13 Apr 15.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial of the applicant’s request to 
change his ADSC from 13 Apr 2015 to 17 Sep 13 indicating there 
is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  There is no 
evidence he applied for TEB through MILCONNECT on 17 Sep 09.  
His first attempt at applying was 23 Mar 11, but given his 
failure to sign the SOU it was not approved.  While he states he 
signed a VA Form 22-1990, Application for VA Education Benefits, 
it is impossible to ascertain whether this was an attempt for 
the member to use the benefit for himself or if he truly felt 
this action would transfer his education benefits.   

The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 15 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission, including 
attachments, in judging the merits of the case; however, we 
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale 
as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this 
application.

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00801 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Feb 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 4 Mar 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 May 14.